Interestingly, Freedland, along with editor Alan Rusbridger, wrote a recent Guardian piece on Climate that managed to omit any mention whatsoever of the Green Party (along with Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, etc, etc), though succeeded in shoe-horning-in an obligatory reference to the Labour Party. A think piece yesterday by a "climate activist" was riddled with some seriously wobbly thinking and seemed to suggest that climate change activism should be uncoupled from anti-capitalism (see: here for parallels) because it polarised the politics of climate change and was causing the Right to entrench their position. Really? So, what, like you think Shell / BP / etc have made any efforts whatsoever to meet anyone, anywhere in the middle at any point in last 30+ years? No. So, you have to wonder about such pieces - what purpose do they serve - journalistic balance? - no, not in a paper that can't bear to mention the Green Party et al in case it upsets its Wet.Left sponsors and advertisers - a paper that seems more concerned with PRODUCT PLACEMENT and Soft.Liberal branding these days.
So, yeah, Liberal Zionism doesn't seem that unreasonable a term to punt into play.